Atomix Posted January 26, 2008 Report Share Posted January 26, 2008 Picture isn't really that good, needs improving Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaco Posted January 26, 2008 Report Share Posted January 26, 2008 Picture isn't really that good' date=' needs improving[/quote'] You're going to have to be more specific than that. We all wrote out what we thought the picture should look like. You're being a tad too general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Hats Posted January 27, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2008 Yes please more specific as to what you don't like about the image. If it is just the content then that is a personal opinion, and no changes will be made. If it is specific to technique or potential improvements to the character then I may make alterations. I took the OCG corrections Shaco provided, thank you very much for those. I will likely leave this card as is for now unless other OCG is provided or other good points are made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaco Posted January 27, 2008 Report Share Posted January 27, 2008 So, just so I understand this. (Assuming you select Mystic Tomato as a target for its effect) Would you Special Summon the Dark Monster first, or would you remove the top 2 cards of your deck, THEN Special Summon the Dark Monster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Hats Posted January 27, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2008 Interesting question. The effect would resolve as followed:He would be removed from play and then Mystic tomatoes effect would activate, his effect would then activate as part of a chain. Given the way a chain resolves he would remove 2 cards from play (as he is chain link 2) then mystic tomatoes effect would activate as chain link 1.That is what I think would happen, correct me if I am wrong.This means it can potentially stop mystic tomato from searching the card and merely shuffle the deck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaco Posted January 27, 2008 Report Share Posted January 27, 2008 Yeah, that's what I was thinking, but I don't know if another card can interject itself between a card's 2 effects, know what I'm saying. But maybe it can, I'm really not all that sure. We'd need some sort of expert person. (unless enough people agree with what you said ^^) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Hats Posted January 27, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2008 I do think you raise a good point. I could reword it if need be, I think it is more about the structuring of the ability then anything else. It removes 2 other cards from play as the second part of the ability. So yes the logical progression of events would be as stated, but the confusing nature of the progression could be a problem. I will try my best to find a card that would react in a similar manner to this card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.